Ghostdog Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 You know, this self-proclaimed war against terror leaves a bad taste over here in Europe. Let's be honest...what is this war actually about? What's the true motivation of George W. Bush? Is it really the threat by some crazy muslims (btw. i'm muslim too)? I'm not ignoring the fear of global terrorism by no means, but there's more behind this war that has to be taken into consideration. I'll tell you what many europeans think the true reason behind this mess is. It's about Oil and securing a strategic position of the United States in the Middle East. It's pretty strange however, that big construction assignments were awarded to American companies to rebuild the soon to be destroyed country prior to the invasion in Iraq. The economic factor-besides the rampant fear of terrorism- is the main incitement for the presence of American troops in Iraq. Tell me, why does the US act as a world police when its economic interests are threatened and remain silent when millions of innocent people in Africa and other parts of the Third World, are killed by civil wars or AIDS? This kind of hypocrisy and the excessive claim of power of your current adminstration, generates animosity overseas . George W. Bush and his buddies have played the wrong cards in Iraq and they're realising it right now. It's impossible to transplant democracy into a multi-ethnic country. I'm not talking about the form of government but about the perception of democracy in each and every single Iraqi individual. This process of development will take decades and i'm wondering if the people of Iraq will be given this time. I bet some of you guys will consider me anti-american now. But let me tell you, I'm not. I just refuse to believe a single word that comes out of that stupid puppet who is sadly the most powerful man in this world. And i want to provide a view from another angle. Don't get me wrong i'm glad that Saddam can't do more harm to this world , but i want us to think about the fact that this piece of **** has been supported by the US with weapons and millions of $$$ during the war against Iran. Same goes for Ossama bin Laden and the Taliban regime in their war against the Soviets in the 80's. To be honest, how they suddenly became the personified devil is beyond of me. However, i've always wondered if you americans are aware of the ambivalence of US foreign policy. Maybe i'll get my answer now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleMo Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 No way, man! Terrorist = Muslim, right? Right? I know you were just kidding, but that is right thus far. However the opposite is not true (muslim=terrorist) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean O Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I know you were just kidding, but that is right thus far. However the opposite is not true (muslim=terrorist) Tim Mcveigh says hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleMo Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I meant to type the exact opposite was true and I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Tell your friend McVeigh I said hey back. Edit: if you're implying other groups can be terrorists, I just figured you all knew that was a given. I thought you were calling me a friend of Timothy M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jogar84 Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 The US needs to change the rules of engagement and fight like a real army, not a bunch of culturally sensitive sissies, concerned about what Amnesty International or all these human rights groups are saying. Let the troops do what they were trained for. (Look what they did in Somalia just recently and in Afghanistan against the Taliban) And I am sick of hearing the US media talk about the soliders like a bunch of victims. The troops are NOT children. They are grown men that are professionals who want to get their mission accomplished. If you support the troops, then you support the war. There is no such thing as supporting the troops and being against the war. Thats the game a certain political party is playing here in the US. Hopefully, the additional forces will finally settle the violence in Baghdad, if not we are all done for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean O Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 If you support the troops, then you support the war. There is no such thing as supporting the troops and being against the war. Thats the game a certain political party is playing here in the US. Oh be serious. This garbage has been spewing from the mouths of right wing ideologues for decades, and it doesn't make any more sense now than it did in Vietnam. There is 0 reason for our troops to be there, and so the deaths of 3,019 people, and the injuries of 47,657 was completely for naught. Unlike this administration and the blatherings of conservatives, the world is not black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jogar84 Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Sean O, I think I am being serious here. My god, anyone who takes a pro-military stand is immediately some sort of war-mongering Neo-Con. Anyway, I think you are basically mouthing off what the Democrats are saying. These knuckleheads are basically rooting for the US to fail in Iraq so they can take power in 2008. The leftists are all a bunch of hypocrites that have been calling for more troops for the past 2 years, but when Bush orders more, they immediately oppose it. What a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 You know, this self-proclaimed war against terror leaves a bad taste over here in Europe. Let's be honest...what is this war actually about? What's the true motivation of George W. Bush? Is it really the threat by some crazy muslims (btw. i'm muslim too)? I'm not ignoring the fear of global terrorism by no means, but there's more behind this war that has to be taken into consideration. I'll tell you what many europeans think the true reason behind this mess is. It's about Oil and securing a strategic position of the United States in the Middle East. It's pretty strange however, that big construction assignments were awarded to American companies to rebuild the soon to be destroyed country prior to the invasion in Iraq. The economic factor-besides the rampant fear of terrorism- is the main incitement for the presence of American troops in Iraq. Tell me, why does the US act as a world police when its economic interests are threatened and remain silent when millions of innocent people in Africa and other parts of the Third World, are killed by civil wars or AIDS? This kind of hypocrisy and the excessive claim of power of your current adminstration, generates animosity overseas . George W. Bush and his buddies have played the wrong cards in Iraq and they're realising it right now. It's impossible to transplant democracy into a multi-ethnic country. I'm not talking about the form of government but about the perception of democracy in each and every single Iraqi individual. This process of development will take decades and i'm wondering if the people of Iraq will be given this time. I bet some of you guys will consider me anti-american now. But let me tell you, I'm not. I just refuse to believe a single word that comes out of that stupid puppet who is sadly the most powerful man in this world. And i want to provide a view from another angle. Don't get me wrong i'm glad that Saddam can't do more harm to this world , but i want us to think about the fact that this piece of **** has been supported by the US with weapons and millions of $$$ during the war against Iran. Same goes for Ossama bin Laden and the Taliban regime in their war against the Soviets in the 80's. To be honest, how they suddenly became the personified devil is beyond of me. However, i've always wondered if you americans are aware of the ambivalence of US foreign policy. Maybe i'll get my answer now... "stupid puppet"? Interesting choice of words. Puppet to whom? Big ol' mean oil companies? LOL It sure is nice to get a lecture on ambivalent foregn policy from a German,,,,ahem, let's not forget our not so recent past, shall we? Say, 1933 to 1945. Anyway, I lived in Germany for 2 years, and do have a bit of familiararity with the locals. The only thing I know for sure, is that as long as there are seperate countries/states/governments, etc., there will be differing agendas and political aims. This will always be debated, and people in Europe will hate Americans, and their elected officials, and accuse them of anything and everything, and Americans will do likewise to Europeans. Now, mix in a little good old fashioned religious zeal, Chistian or muslim or Hindi or whatever, and you got yourself some fireworks. Everyone will have their opinions about Bush as we've had our opinions about churchill, Hitler, Hussein, JFK, Clinton, Helmut Schmidt, Thatcher, Minh, Bin-Laden, etc. Add to that our cultural upbringings, and you will see various forms of xenophobia. I don't think you are anti-american, I just think you bring all your particular baggage to your point of view, same as I bring mine. That's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immac Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I know you were just kidding, but that is right thus far. However the opposite is not true (muslim=terrorist) Timothy McVeigh was muslim? Why isn't Bush considered a terrorist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean O Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Anyway, I think you are basically mouthing off what the Democrats are saying. These knuckleheads are basically rooting for the US to fail in Iraq so they can take power in 2008. No, the Bush Administration is setting us up for total failure by again not coming up with an acceptable plan so they can say the Dems couldn't fix the problem either. The leftists are all a bunch of hypocrites that have been calling for more troops for the past 2 years, but when Bush orders more, they immediately oppose it. What a joke! Huh? All of those protests saying to get out of Iraq now were really trying to increase troop levels? This doesn't make any sense. Are you talking about politicians hoping for more troops? The situation on the ground was drastically different months and years ago, and having more troops before it developed into a civil war likely would've helped. Now, because of Bush's inaction, we have no chance of either helping out Iraq long-term, or extricating ourselves while saving face. Remember that Bush's administration went in without an exit strategy, without an understanding of the division between Shi'a and Sunni, without a plan for occupying the power vacuum, and without adequate armor for the soldiers. How is that supporting our troops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immac Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Sean O don't forget he sent them in with insufficient armor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immac Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Well the polls are in and the news is having a field day. This is the worst reception of a presidential speech since Vietnam. Even Clinton went up 16 points after his address during the Lewinsky scandal. The media is comparing what's happening now to the end of Nixon's days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 No, the Bush Administration is setting us up for total failure by again not coming up with an acceptable plan so they can say the Dems couldn't fix the problem either. Huh? All of those protests saying to get out of Iraq now were really trying to increase troop levels? This doesn't make any sense. Are you talking about politicians hoping for more troops? The situation on the ground was drastically different months and years ago, and having more troops before it developed into a civil war likely would've helped. Now, because of Bush's inaction, we have no chance of either helping out Iraq long-term, or extricating ourselves while saving face. Remember that Bush's administration went in without an exit strategy, without an understanding of the division between Shi'a and Sunni, without a plan for occupying the power vacuum, and without adequate armor for the soldiers. How is that supporting our troops? While it does indeed appear that Bush went in to Iraq without an exit strategy, I think that what has happened is that politics, public opinion shaped by talking heads and those with the means to broadcast their opinions have re-defined nearly everything about this war, including what they consider an exit strategy. If it were possible to get an honest, un-baised polling whether Americans support the war or don't, I would guess that most do support it. I just don't think it's possible to get any honest coverage about it from the left or the right at this point. I also believe that to give any creedence to what Europeans think is just folly. I am not particularly interested in hearing what those who gave us Adolph Hitler, Atilla the Hun, Himmler, Mengele, Napoleon, Lenin, Breshnev, Kruschev, Stalin, etc., etc. have to say about what we as a sovreign nation do. Feel free to consider it arrogance on my part, but that is simply an easy way out. The REASON this country exists, is because we ESCAPED the repeated and historical tyranny that the best of Europe CONTINUES to offer. They are NOT a credible source. They are a trading partner, but they are unreliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hory Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Before you start crapping all over Europe, remember that if it were not for the support of the French at the time of the revolution, the United States as it is today may not have even existed. Also, Great Britain, Spain & Poland were part of the "Coalition of the Willing" that went into Iraq. Those countries were part of Europe last time I checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean O Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I also believe that to give any creedence to what Europeans think is just folly. I am not particularly interested in hearing what those who gave us Adolph Hitler, Atilla the Hun, Himmler, Mengele, Napoleon, Lenin, Breshnev, Kruschev, Stalin, etc., etc. have to say about what we as a sovreign nation do. Feel free to consider it arrogance on my part, but that is simply an easy way out. And we created plenty of tyrants, racists and bad people as well, does that make us completely worthless? Using some bad examples to discount everyone is a fallacious way of making an argument. The REASON this country exists, is because we ESCAPED the repeated and historical tyranny that the best of Europe CONTINUES to offer. They are NOT a credible source. They are a trading partner, but they are unreliable. And we had slavery for hundreds of years, eliminated the Native Americans, engaged in colonial conquests which did nothing but kill and maim the inhabitants, and started many questionable wars for our own benefit. You can't cherry pick things like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 And we created plenty of tyrants, racists and bad people as well, does that make us completely worthless? Using some bad examples to discount everyone is a fallacious way of making an argument. And we had slavery for hundreds of years, eliminated the Native Americans, engaged in colonial conquests which did nothing but kill and maim the inhabitants, and started many questionable wars for our own benefit. You can't cherry pick things like this. the POINT was exactly what you just made. We, the US certainly have created plenty of tyrants. THAT is the point....to dispell the notion that somehow Europe is better than the US or anyone else. They aren't. As for the cherry picking argument, same thing. HUMANS have always been bad. I am merely saying that before we "start crapping on the US", we SURE don't need to place the Europeans on a pedastal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I will be the first to admit the US is guility of a myriad of sins. Just don't try to sell me a bill of goods on how great ANY other country is or has been. We, humankind, are all guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hory Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 we SURE don't need to place the Europeans on a pedastal. Huh? I may have missed this but I don't think anyone was placing "the Europeans" on a pedestal?? I saw the guy from Germany savaging American foreign policy but I don't think he was necessarily saying that historically European or German foreign policy was/is any better. afaik the current chancellor of Germany supports the war anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Before you start crapping all over Europe, remember that if it were not for the support of the French at the time of the revolution, the United States as it is today may not have even existed. Also, Great Britain, Spain & Poland were part of the "Coalition of the Willing" that went into Iraq. Those countries were part of Europe last time I checked. Yes, the French ideed aided America in their time of need. America has had much help in her history. I think there's probably been a time or two that America has helped a European country or two, ,,,, last time I checked, anyway. But, I am convinced that as long as there is an America, there will always be hatred towards it, regardless of who is the sitting prez, or what her foreign policies are. That is until she is no longer a superpower, then it won't matter. That's just a reality check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lautrec Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Let me just end my input in this conversation with this final thought: Americans and The United States of America are just one piece of the puzzle that is the human experience. There is good and bad coming from this current war in iraq. Can the entire world unite, share a common goal? As long as there is power to be aquired, money to be made, peoples to be controlled and religion to be practiced, we'll never see eye to eye. But, I am a die-hard Panoutintheendologist, and have hope. Think about it. Best wishes to all, my fellow humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hory Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 But, I am convinced that as long as there is an America, there will always be hatred towards it, regardless of who is the sitting prez, or what her foreign policies are. That is until she is no longer a superpower, then it won't matter. That's just a reality check. This is so true, I think the thing that annoys me most about this war of choice is that GW has pissed away all the goodwill and support the US had around the world following 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan. Now this huge mistake that the invasion of Iraq has become is a rallying cry for "Anti-American" interests around the world and the level of worldwide animosity towards the US is far greater than it was prior to 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el_jefe061 Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I am not particularly interested in hearing what those who gave us Adolph Hitler, Atilla the Hun, Himmler, Mengele, Napoleon, Lenin, Breshnev, Kruschev, Stalin, etc., etc. have to say about what we as a sovreign nation do. This could be the dumbest thing I have ever heard. "Let's not listen to what Arabs say because they produced Osama Bin Laden!" "Let's not listen to Black people because that race produced OJ Simpson!". That might be the dumbest argument I've ever heard. Half of those guys were Russian (Our enemies, and ONE country in Europe) and most of the rest aren't even in this historical period. Should we not listen to the Japanese now? Because of that whole World War II thing? How about we base our foreign policy off things from decades ago. Hell, if we turn the clock back to the Reagan administration, we wouldn't have to worry about Saddam because we'd be giving him WMD's to fight Iran with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRog Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I am not particularly interested in hearing what those who gave us Adolph Hitler, Atilla the Hun, Himmler, Mengele, Napoleon, Lenin, Breshnev, Kruschev, Stalin, etc., do you know anything about some of these people. Lenin was brilliant. He worked off of Karl Marx's work to help build the theory of communism and helped bring russia to stability after the czar Nicholas II was overthrown. Communism in theory is an excellent government. In practice is when it looks horrible. Napoleon- also a brilliant mind. Great battle tacticion and was a good ruler. Atilla the Hun- atilla was a hun simple as that. they were barbaric people but he was a great warrior (Consider this: Back in the early ages after christ everyone other than the romans where basically fighting to survive. YOu had to be savage just to be succsesful (sp?)). He reigned over what was then Europe's largest empire, from 434 until his death. His empire stretched from Germany and the Netherlands to the Ural river and from the Danube River to Poland and Estonia. Historians consider him as a great and noble king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medric822 Posted January 12, 2007 Author Share Posted January 12, 2007 Ok, it seems that he had problems with any world ruler that wasn't from the U.S. which is everyone he listed. Only two of the guys on that list were truely crazy, Stalin, and Hitler. He also forgot to add Mussolini. Leader of the Facisg Government if Italy during W.W. II. Why not add Alexander the Great to that list, as well as King George III of Britain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immac Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Honest question: Is Bush really much better than Saddam? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.